[The Final Boss]

I'm not entirely sure how the U.K. runs its systems, but here we have three branches, president, judges, and representatives. Each has a check/balance system, so no system has over control.

One such captcha is the president names judges to the highest courts, but needs approval by representatives, which brings me to my point. Recently, Preseident Obama got his chance to nominate a judge, and choice somebody with relatively no experience as a judge. My question to ya'll is wouldn't you want somebody with plenty of court rulings for the highest judicial positions in the country? Not to say the person is a bad person, she did pass review by representatives, somehow, but should experience a sole determinant? Thoughts?

[Benji Dude]

Politics is a messy business son. American politics even more so, the American supreme high court is a powerful tool and as president you'd want it to make things go your way when the shit hits the fan. So it's not just about experience, it's about putting someone in there who'll back your corner, someone who can argue your point of view (all Muslims are terrorists waiting to strike for example) to the others and get them to change their mind.

That's why he went for someone with little experience, easier to influence a fresh face than a jaded one.

Like I said, politics is a messy business.

[The Final Boss]

Oh I understand why she was chosen, and elected, I just completely disagree on her hiring 'qualities'...Especially considering its a lifetime position that pays 200some thousand a year, when most Americans would kill for that(between me and Another_Castle, it would take us 8 years to have that much...), trifold magnified in these harsh economic times.